Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!ukma!rutgers!psuvax1!news From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Amiga in the Workforce Message-ID: Date: 1 Jun 91 19:50:46 GMT References: <1991May23.083717.1055@cs.ruu.nl> <1991May22.211703.22445@leland.Stanford.EDU> <1991May22.222801.4049@convex.com> <1991May23.012705.24776@leland.Stanford.EDU><2471@cluster.cs.su.oz.au> Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet) Organization: Penn State Computer Science Lines: 22 In-Reply-To: arctngnt@amiganet.chi.il.us's message of 31 May 91 01: 09:49 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws7.sys.cs.psu.edu In article arctngnt@amiganet.chi.il.us (Bowie J Poag) writes: Heres a question for you... Why would even WANT to use Lotus, Wordperfect, and DBase on the Amiga? They suck! There are MUCH BETTER equivalents to these programs on the Amiga. Ones that would make IBM users drool. Hell, I have PD word processors that have twice as many control options as does Wordperfect, and its FREE, as opposed to shelling out $500 for WP 5.0...Idiots. You seem to be overlooking the compatibility factor. Many (millions of) computer users simply use their machines for 123 and Word Perfect. That is their primary criteria for choosing a computer. People who want to do a little work at home are going to buy a cheap DOS machine instead of an A500 because these two products are not available for it. Maybe it's just me, but I think Commodore is missing out on a few sales by not having these products on their machines. Very good substitutues that are file(read AND write) compatible are probably acceptable. -Mike